Davids Medienkritik on a Rampage: Biased German Media Better Run for the Hills!

Thank you too all of our readers! You make this possible. With your support things just keep getting better and better for this site. October 2004 was a record month for us with over 130,000 unique visitors, that is over 4,300 visitors a day. Stay tuned for all the post-election action in November...whoever wins there is sure to be one big loser: The German media

The coming presidential election in the US has caused German leftist media, such as SPIEGEL ONLINE, to scratch the bottom of the biased journalism barrel. The limits of good taste and journalistic probity are simply ignored.

These extracts emphatically prove the magnitude of the damage done to the minds of leftist German journalists by George W. Bush:

Is the USA a rouge nation? Is George Bush a warlord? The Italian philosopher sees America’s “war on evil” as a symbol of a frightening development – crisis becomes the norm. Democracy is morphing into a civilian dictatorship.

Since then (9/11) a warlord rules in Washington who has declared that “old rules” are no longer applicable in the “war on evil” and therefore ignores them. All obligations under law and justice are subject to being overruled by national security considerations. He mounts the stage as commander in chief of the armed forces that can, by “military order” obviate international law and the human right to freedom, and create military commissions to replace courts. …

… critics in Europe think that the way in which democracy and the rule of law are being attacked is a dramatic thing…

The German movie director Wim Winders, who has made several films about the USA, announced that, should Bush be reelected, he would no longer travel to the country he was so enthusiastic about.

According to Agamben, Bush’s “military order” has transformed the prisoners at Guantánamo into judicial non-persons. They, just as the Jews in concentration camps, “have lost their juridical identity.”

The naked detainee on the leash (in Abu Ghraib)reminds one of the horrible pictures of concentration camp inmates. (emphasis added)

Spiegel Online undertakes only weak attempts to soften the unbelievable tactless comparison between Abu Ghraib and Auschwitz. Nevertheless, even printing Agamben’s idiotic theses is an unforgivable affront to America (and to historical truth).

But I daresay that I really love Wim Winder’s threat not to travel to the USA in the event of a Bush reelection. I’m sure that that, in view of the director’s growing reputation for deadly boring movies, will – all across the country – have the impact of a multi-megaton bomb.

Pay attention America! Now you know what THE election is – either John Kerry gets elected or Wim Winders stays in Germany.

And speaking of Michael Moore, this is what the filmmaker had to say in endorsing John Kerry today on CNN:

"MOORE: Yes. Yes, that's right. Now I'm the guy who is supporting what Bush calls the No. 1 liberal in the Senate. There's a reason he calls him that. That's because he is. He is a liberal. He's -- he's very different, and there's a real clear choice between him and Bush.
With John Kerry, we're going to make sure people have health insurance. We're not going to have a $5.15 minimum wage anymore. And we're going to bring these kids home from Iraq. That I am confident of, and that's a clear choice and a clear reason to vote for John Kerry." (emphasis ours)

Wow, that means John Kerry is liberal even by Michael Moore's standards. I think I hear someone at the Kerry campaign yelling "Michael...shut up!..."

Be sure to vote on CNN's poll as to whom the bin Laden tape will harm or benefit.

Here's this year's undisputed winner of the prestigious "Idiocy Award for Absolutely Ridiculous Statements in the German Media": Hendrik Zörner, press secretary of the Association of German Journalists (Deutscher Journalistenverband).

Zörner criticizes a pro-Bush statement of a conservative journalist in Germany's daily BILD. He says journalists should be "non-partisan". He also points out that an endorsement could influence the decision of Americans living in Germany. (Note to Mr. Zörner: Most Americans living in Germany who wanted to vote already sent off their absentee ballots long ago.)

Zörner to BILD: "Journalists should be "non-partisan." An endorsement could influence the decision...

"Non-partisan" German journalists, when it comes to George W. Bush? This guy must be kidding! I presume Zörner has spent the last two or three years in solitary confinement somewhere in the North Polar region. He simply never read any of SPIEGEL's or STERN's hate filled anti-Bush articles, and nobody told him about the many examples of highly biased anti-Bush broadcasts on German TV. And reduced to non-verbal communication with polar bears and sea otters during his North Pole sabbatical it is quite understandable that Zörner isn't aware of the many anti-Bush covers (above) of Germany's high brow journals.

Now, I'm not sure whether George W. Bush in the minds of the journalistic brass of SPIEGEL and STERN has already surpassed Hitler as the most dangerous politician ever or whether he's still in a close second place, way in front of Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, or this cuddle baby of the German Left, Fidel Castro. In any case, the pure mention of the name of the current U.S. president serves as a trigger for hate-filled, venomous reactions among the leading German left-wing publications.

I dare not even remotely envision what will happen if George W. Bush actually wins next Tuesday's election... The German media will squarely put the blame on BILD's support of Bush, next to the eternal stupidity of the American electorate.

BTW: have a look at Zörner's picture. Obviously, this guy is completely relaxed and open minded. My favorite image of a left-wing German journalist...

Note from Ray: Zörner and the rest of the angry left-wing German media trying to lecture BILD on "objectivity" is kind of like having a group of porn stars trying to lecture us on the virtues of abstinence. Talk about hypocrisy.

Perhaps the largest October surprise in Germany is the BILD newspaper's endorsement of President George W. Bush. BILD, which has the widest circulation of any newspaper in Europe, lists the following 10 reasons why Bush should be re-elected:

Update: The list we had up earlier was an abbreviated summary of the 10 reasons. We have now translated BILD's list of reasons in their entirety. Here they are:

1. Bush has clear priorities. He sees the inhuman Islamic fundamentalism and the murderous mullahs as the largest danger for the Western world.

2. Bush has learned the lessons of history. Military strength, not pleasant talk, is the only thing that helps against violent fanatics. And with Bush -- unlike with Kerry -- there is no doubt about this.

3. Under Bush, the US, as a superpower, will continue to bear the financial, military and casualty burden in the fight against terrorism in a "holy war" which Islamic fanatics unilaterally declared.

4. Along with fighting terror and the terrorists, a re-elected Bush will do everything he can to prevent nuclear proliferation. That is especially true with regard to the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea.

5. Bush has learned that America can defeat every country in war, but needs allies in peace. Thus, his second term will be characterized by cooperation with international partners. But he will not depend on how Syria or Libya vote at the UN.

6. Bush knows that Europe and Germany don’t have the military at their disposal to become involved in any further foreign military engagements. Therefore he won't ask them for help. Kerry will do exactly that – and will further burden already damaged German-American relations.

7. Under Bush, America will remain a reliable partner for Israel in its fight for survival. That must especially be in our German interest.

8. Republicans have always been stronger supporters of free trade than Democrats. That is also true of Bush when compared to Kerry. And that is good for Germany as an export nation.

9. Every new American administration makes mistakes. Bush has already made his. Kerry, on the other hand, has of yet held no (executive) position in the government. He would be worse prepared than most Presidents preceding him.

10. With Bush, we know what to expect. With Kerry, nobody knows what he stands for and where he wants to lead America – and the world.

Certainly, BILD should be applauded for its courage. Supporting George W. Bush in a nation where the overwhelming majority of the leftist dominated media absolutely seethe with hate for Mr. Bush is no small matter. The newspaper's email inbox is likely jammed with thousands of angry, outraged emails by now. But BILD's action proves that not all Germans have bought into the anti-American, anti-Bush mindset of most of the nation's media publications.

Stern Endorses Kerry (Left: Last week's Stern depicts an American cowboy boot crushing German workers. Right: A Stern from earlier this year depicts Bush and the ruins of the World Trade Center with the headline "How America Lied to the World.")

Stern's Chief Editor Thomas Osterkorn writes:

"With John Kerry a more reconciliatory President would occupy the White House. He is simply closer to the Europeans and the Germans."

More reconciliatory? Keep in mind that the German government has already clearly stated that it will not send troops to Iraq, regardless of who wins the election. The French have effectively said the same thing. What countries will Kerry get more troops from at his "summit" to internationalize the effort in Iraq? We honestly couldn't tell you.

And Mr. Kerry has already insulted America's current allies as a "coalition of the bribed and coerced." What nations will want to join him in a war that he himself called a "mistake" and "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time?" Those are important questions the American people will have to consider on election day.

Be sure to check out our list of recommended readings on Germany, the USA and the upcoming elections.

Note: For those of you who missed it, Medienkritik has also made an endorsement. It may surprise you...it may not...

Speaking of endorsements: Here is an article from the Washington Post (not exactly known as a conservative paper) pointing out that members of the US National Guard fighting the war in Iraq and their family members overwhelmingly endorse the leadership of President Bush by a two-thirds majority. Around three-quarters of active military support the President. That wouldn't seem to indicate Iraq is a disaster as some have claimed...

Update from David: Here's a guy who doesn't agree with BILD's endorsement. Michael Moore disagrees with BILD as well, calling John Kerry a real "liberal" on CNN. And here's another online poll, in the German daily WELT...Choose your candidate and then click "abstimmen" at the bottom of the page.

The entire explosives story seems to have taken yet another twist. This via Drudge :

"GERTZ // THURSDAY // WASH TIMES: Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned. John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, “almost certainly” removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad."

It will be interesting to see whether the Russians and/or Syrians confirm this, deny this or simply refuse to comment.

'60 Minutes' Jeff Fager: Godfather of Big Media's Hall of Shame

The Washington Times is also currently running an article entitled "CBS eyed '60 Minutes' Bush bombshell." Remember, it was Jeff Fager, executive producer of the Sunday edition of '60 Minutes,' who said in a statement that "our plan was to run the story on October 31, but it became clear that it wouldn't hold..." In other words, Jeff Fager was planning to drop an election-eve bomb on the Bush campaign and would have done so had it not been for the NY Times' decision to come out with the story earlier this week.

Apparently, Mr. Fager has a very long track record of bias that reaches back much further than the attempted explosives story setup or the forged National Guard documents debacle. Bernard Goldberg, who worked for 28 years at CBS, describes Mr. Fager vividly in his book "BIAS." (The was after Mr. Goldberg had written a now famous op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal in 1996 accusing CBS of liberal bias, unleashing a furor within the network.) On pages 217 and 218 Goldberg writes of Fager:

"My contract was coming up for renewal, and this would be the perfect time for CBS News to let me go, quietly, without the noise it would have caused if they flat-out fired me right after the op-ed was published.

But there was a new magazine CBS News had just decided to do -- a president of CBS News, said "it was a no-brainer" that I should be one of the correspondents. Except for one thing. Andrew said he wouldn't interfere with the decision of the show's new executive producer, Jeff Fager -- the same Jeff Fager who ran the CBS Evening News when my op-ed appeared and who had been one of its many critics.

I met with Fager in his office on West 57th Street in New York on August 11, 1998 at Andrew's urging. A meeting couldn't hurt, Andrew figured. We talked about the new show for a while, but I sensed a tension during the conversation, so I asked if there was a problem.

This was the same word Rather was using, saying he would "never" forgive me for what I had done. It was no secret that when Dan Rather sneezes, Jeff Fager (and every other executive producer who works for Dan) catches cold. And since Dan was the lead correspondent on the new 60 Minutes II, and since Fager was using the very same language Dan was using, I knew I was a dead man walking.

Fager said he would keep me in mind for one of the correspondent slots, which we both knew wasn't true.
A month later, on September 15, 1998, he made it official. Fager called me at home in Miami and said I would not be on the show. It's true: payback is a bitch.

That's when I decided that I would no longer let any of them continue to punish me. Day in and day out, they would scrutinize politicians and business people and doctors and lawyers and put what they found on television for millions to see. But they would "never" let me off the hook for scrutinizing them.

What a bunch of hypocrites, I kept thinking, these people who examine anybody and everybody's life but will "never" forgive me for writing about their liberal bias."

Looks like CBS will have to come up with a new story to swing the election. Regardless who wins this tight election, it is already clear that one party will lose by a landslide: Big Media.

This entire election just keeps getting more bizarre as we approach it. One of our regular commenters, Stefan H., just emailed this article from WorldNetDaily. Another last minute election surprise? Are these documents legit? This could shake up the entire election. Here are excerpts:

"The first documentary evidence that Vietnamese communists were directly steering John Kerry's antiwar group Vietnam Veterans Against the War has been discovered in a U.S. archive, according to a researcher who spoke with WorldNetDaily.

One freshly unearthed document, captured by the U.S. from Vietnamese communists in 1971 and later translated, indicates the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese delegations to the Paris peace talks that year were used as the communications link to direct the activities of Kerry and other antiwar activists who attended.

Kerry insists he attended the talks only because he happened to be in France on his honeymoon and maintains he met with both sides. But previously revealed records indicate the future senator made two, and possibly three, trips to Paris to meet with Viet Cong leader Madame Nguyen Thi Binh then promote her plan's demand for U.S. surrender.

Jerome Corsi, a specialist on the Vietnam era, told WND the new discoveries are the "most remarkable documents I've seen in the entire history of the antiwar movement."

"We're not going to say he's an agent for Vietnamese communists, but it's the next thing to it," he said. "Whether he was consciously carrying out their direction or naively doing what they wanted, it amounted to the same thing – he advanced their cause."

Hopefully someone with some expertise looks into this to find out if this is for real or not. I wonder if 60 Minutes was planning on running these documents Sunday night? So far the mainstream media hasn't reported on any of this...

And why isn't Osama bin Laden on the air? Nothing could possibly hurt Bush more. Al-Qaeda must know that. That is more evidence indicating OBL is dead, that the US and Bush either did get him or he died on the run in the meantime.

"In 1992 it was the Iran Contra charges brought days before the election... In 2000 it was the DUI charges a few days before the vote... And Now...

60 MINS PLANNED BUSH MISSING EXPLOSIVES STORY FOR ELECTION EVE

News of missing explosives in Iraq -- first reported in April 2003 -- was being resurrected for a 60 MINUTES election eve broadcast designed to knock the Bush administration into a crisis mode.

Jeff Fager, executive producer of the Sunday edition of 60 MINUTES, said in a statement that "our plan was to run the story on October 31, but it became clear that it wouldn't hold..."

Elizabeth Jensen at the LOS ANGELES TIMES details on Tuesday how CBS NEWS and 60 MINUTES lost the story [which repackaged previously reported information on a large cache of explosives missing in Iraq, first published and broadcast in 2003].

The story instead debuted in the NYT. The paper slugged the story about missing explosives from April 2003 as "exclusive."

An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003, one day after the liberation of Iraq.

According to NBCNEWS, the explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived. [VIDEO CLIP]

It is not clear who exactly shopped an election eve repackaging of the missing explosives story.

The LA TIMES claims: The source on the story first went to 60 MINUTES but also expressed interest in working with the NY TIMES... "The tip was received last Wednesday."

CBSNEWS' plan to unleash the story just 24 hours before election day had one senior Bush official outraged.

"Darn, I wanted to see the forged documents to show how this was somehow covered up," the Bush source, who asked not to be named, mocked, recalling last months CBS airing of fraudulent Bush national guard letters.

It now appears that some in the media had an October surprise in mind for President Bush. Even the German media is backing-off of this missing explosives story in a hurry.

And Andrew Sullivan's recent posting on this now appears rather troubling:

"WINNING THE NEWS CYCLE: The dynamic in this final week often comes down to shoring up vulnerable states and winning the news cycle. Ryan Lizza emphasizes how successful Kerry has been with the latter:

As for the explosives story, it shows once again how effective the Kerry campaign has been at turning the spotlight away from its candidate and back onto Bush's failures."

Yes, the recycled explosives story has been remarkably effective in "winning the news cycle"...and that is what is so scary about it...and then the mainstream media wonder why people are turning them off in record numbers...

"... The facility had been identified by the International Atomic Energy Agency as a suspected chemical, biological and nuclear weapons site. U.N. inspectors visited the plant at least nine times, including as recently as Feb. 18. The facility is part of a larger complex known as the Latifiyah Explosives and Ammunition Plant al Qa Qaa. The senior U.S. official, based in Washington and speaking on condition of anonymity, said the material was under further study. The site is enormous and U.S. troops are still investigating it for potential weapons of mass destruction, the official said. "Initial reports are that the material is probably just explosives, but we're still going through the place," the official said. Peabody said troops found thousands of boxes, each of which contained three vials of white powder, together with documents written in Arabic that dealt with how to engage in chemical warfare."

How to engage in chemical warfare? Wait a minute...I thought Iraq didn't have any WMD programs...

"It also now turns out that CBS 60 Minutes was planning to echo the New York Times story two days before Election Day. So what we have is an attempt by the New York Times, CBS, and a U.N. agency to work together to promote a very likely false story to damage President Bush's reelection prospects. Perhaps no one should be surprised that the liberal media and the United Nations are willing to go to quite extraordinary lengths to promote Kerry's prospects against Bush, but their behavior is not the issue. The issue is Kerry's willingness to advance allegations that his own campaign acknowledges may not be true."

As the US election quickly approaches, Medienkritik would like to make its position known on this vital event. As a German publication, Medienkritik feels that it is not our place and it is not our job to interfere in internal American political affairs or to try to exercise influence on the election by endorsing one side or the other. Frankly, we feel that foreign attempts (such as the Guardian letter-writing debacle) to influence the outcome of the US election are despicable.

Democracy Matters

In 1945, after twelve years of war and the most brutal fascist dictatorship, democracy was re-established in West Germany by the United States and other democratic nations. The war against the Nazis and the ensuing occupation of Germany were marked by repeated setbacks, mistakes and losses that were costly in terms of both human life and financial resources. But despite the numerous defeats, despite losing hundreds of thousands of men on the battlefield, America saw the war through to victory and defeated the murderous regime of Adolf Hitler. During the Cold War that followed, the US refused to waver in Berlin in 1949 in the face of the Soviet blockade. The US did what it took financially to rebuild a nation in shambles and introduced the Marshall Plan. The US did not back down in 1961 when US and Soviet tanks stood only meters apart, turret to turret at Checkpoint Charlie. Despite widespread protest, the US refused to back off in the 1980s when the Soviets threatened to tip the strategic missile balance on the continent in their favor. During World War II and the Cold War, the US did what it took and made the sacrifices that had to be made year for year, decade for decade.

We Will Not Forget

We at Medienkritik will never forget what many in the German media have already forgotten: The United States of America liberated Germany from fascist tyranny and stood by our nation as both friend and protector for over four decades in the face of Communism until the Berlin Wall that divided our nation at its heart finally came crashing down. Because of the many painful sacrifices made by the United States, Germany today is a unified, democratic land at peace in the world and Europe is a continent bustling with democracies and open societies.

And our relationship with America today is based on more than our appreciation for their help in the past. Despite its flaws, America remains a bright example of freedom, forward thinking and the willingness to take risks. And with all due criticism: The US media’s reporting and commentary is far more diverse and interesting than the indoctrination-oriented German media.

So we want our readers to know that whoever wins the upcoming US elections, Medienkritik will continue to fight anti-American bias in the German media, wherever and whenever it should rear its ugly head.

Vote

In closing we would simply like to say this: Democracy is something that members of free societies should never take for granted. It has been dearly paid for in the past and continues to be dearly paid for around the world today in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. We at Medienkritik therefore humbly encourage all our American readers to participate in the political process and the upcoming election. Whether you are a Republican, Democrat or Independent, exercise that simple and basic right that signifies our freedom: Vote.

Here's the latest conspiracy theory circulating among Germany's loony left, as presented in a public discussion at the Berlin Volksbühne:

"The New York philosophress Nancy Fraser ... recognizes in the current situation the gravest domestic political crisis since the civil war: 'There is a chance that we will experience massive voter fraud.'" For the new voting machines are manufactured by Diebold, a company which is rumored to have conservative sympathies. And Diebold has not allowed to analyze the software. "I see domestically an erosion of democracy, which I don't understand, but which really scares me", Ms. Fraser revealed.

This comes in handy, just in case Bush is reelected...

(Translation by Paul)

Update: This should alarm the German media: It's not just the Diebold-neocon conspiracy - BUSH IS GOING TO REPEAL VOTING RIGHTS FOR BLACKS AND WOMEN!! SPON, can you hear me??

Here are just a few of the outstanding comments we received on SPIEGEL ONLINE's allegations that expats were the victims of "voter suppression" perpetrated by the Bush administration and the Department of Defense in an attempt to keep Democrats from voting:

Hector writes:

This report is complete rubbish. One can order voting materials online, from an embassy or consulate, or get materials from a US military unit. Too bad SPON did not interview any Americans, or better yet, interview a unit's voting assistance officer. The Pentagon website is only an adjunct to the hundreds of sources available to expat Americans. Did that supposed American in Munich go to the consulate? They would have provided him everything he needed. Once again, since the hated stereotype is all they need, why bother with facts?

helian writes:

As for the question asked in the post, you really have to laugh. I can just see SPIEGEL's "highly motivated Kerry voter" Philip Sutherland breaking down in tears because he couldn't register to vote on the Pentagon's website. Waaaahhh!! Poor baby, the evil military brass must have deleted access to Google from his browser while he was out working for Siemens. Otherwise he would have noticed that his city, state, county, party, and about a zillion other websites would have been glad to spoon feed him his voter registration. Funny, I had no trouble registering to vote in Germany in the 70's, and that was before (gasp!) anyone even had a personal computer. "Motivated voters" like Phil just applied for an absentee ballot via snailmail, and, believe it or not, in those anti-deluvian, pre-Internet days, their ballots were duly delivered and they still managed to vote! I wonder why that recourse never occurred to "motivated voter" Phil. Was his butt screwed to the ground? Did all the county clerks in the USA suddenly die, and no one told me?? If so, SPIEGEL didn't mention it. I guess I'll just have to write it off as another example of biased journalism.

Scott writes:

I had trouble getting through (to the website for absentee expat voters), too. I never gave it much thought because there are so many other ways to get an absentee ballot. Then, I read about why (the site was administered by the Pentagon, I think, and it got caught up in their efforts to combat hacking, which is understandable in a time of war -- Unfortunate? Yes. Intelligent? Probably not. But no conspiracy. More like typical govt bureaucracy than anything else.). Ironically, the article I read mentioned an alternate site (no pun intended) run by the Democrats. I used that site (it's run by the Dems, but anyone can use it), got my ballot, and have cast my vote. No problem.

JR writes:

trouble voting absentee?? Nope, not al all. If you're registered, you get your ballots. I've got ours from the County I last lived in the US, no problem. People should really try to keep alive without the computer, an old habit almost forgotten it seems.

PapaScott writes:

his is now the the 4th presidential election in which I've voted since coming to Germany, and thanks to the FVAP website, it was never easier to arrange for my absentee ballot than it was in 2004. Of course, I made my arrangements back in January in order to vote in the Arizona primary. Having done that, my ballot for the general election was automatically sent to me this month. And just to make sure, the Democratic National Committee sent me a Federal Write-In Ballot to use just in case I received to official ballot. Even in September, when I saw the first stories about this, I had no problems reaching fvap.gov.

"We are, within the framework of our possibilities, prepared to become involved in the stabilization of the situation in Iraq, for example through the mentioned training of police and soldiers outside of Iraq or through the civil rebuilding in Iraq. But not just President Bush, but also presidential candidate Kerry knows that the position of the German government not to send any troops to Iraq is not dependent upon who will be elected in the American elections." (emphasis ours)

It is becoming more and more clear with each passing day that Germany and France will not send troops to Iraq even if John Kerry should win the election. So the big question remains: If elected, which allies will a President Kerry convince to join the US in Iraq after calling the war a "mistake" fought at the wrong place and the wrong time? Mr. Kerry's promises to build a broader coalition and attract more international allies to Iraq seem awfully hollow. Perhaps Burkina Faso can still be convinced...

Voigt: Bush has Himself to Blame for Germans' Negative Perceptions

Mr. Voigt's reaction to the following question was also interesting:

"Question: Most Germans want Kerry to be the next US President. Despite that, wouldn't it be simpler for the position of the German government if Bush were re-elected?

Answer: I believe that here there is a difference between the populace and the experts in the government, who not only know that we have to work together with the American president, no matter what his name is. The experts also know that there are moderate differences between the candidates, but no principal differences in the foreign and security policy. That is something that is not perceived by the German people in the same manner, because there naturally the rhetoric of Bush that is aimed at a particular political clientele and political milieu is not exactly something that in the same way garners great favor. I believe that the differences in the policy, that do indeed exist, are not as dramatic as they are, in part, perceived by the general population." (emphasis ours)

So according to Voigt, the main reason that most Germans can't see how similar Bush and Kerry really are is because of "Bush's rhetoric." In other words, it is Bush's own fault that people in Germany dislike him in overwhelming numbers. "Selberschuld" Mr. President.

But is that really what is behind Germans' disdain for Bush? Is Mr. Voigt giving us the complete picture?

Hmmmm...I wonder if Mr. Voigt thinks any of this objective German media coverage has influenced Germans' perceptions of Bush:

Could this sort of media coverage possibly have influenced Germans Mr. Voigt?

One thing is clear: It is certainly much easier from a political point of view for Mr. Voigt to place all the blame on Bush and his "rhetoric." Bush has become a favorite scapegoat for nearly everything of late. Now he is even being blamed for job losses in Germany. After all, why should the German media blame the Socialist-Green government's failing economic policy when they can point the finger at the evil American cowboy? It certainly sells more magazines and numbs the pain.

But can we really blame poor Mr. Voigt? It really wouldn't make much sense for a member of the Socialist Schroeder administration to criticize such strong natural allies in the German media. Why bite the hand that feeds you?

German TV station Pro7 will broadcast Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" on November 1, 2004 - just 1 day before the U.S. elections.

In announcing (Click on "TV-Tipp 20:15 Fahrenheit 9/11") its broadcast Pro7 claims that

“Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 deals with the ominous ties between the Bush family and the top terrorist Osma bin Laden and that, thanks both to the power of the facts presented and to Moore’s emotional, honest disgust, it is convincing. The Oscar winning director never claims to be an impartial observer of the September 11th, 2001, attacks - he definitely opposes the current administration's policy.”

No need to comment on the anti-Bush bias in this announcement...

A special irony is to be found in the fact that Pro7 belongs to the ProSiebenSat.1 Group, the majority owner of which is the American investor Haim Saban, who lives in Los Angeles. There is no doubt that a decision as politically sensitive as the broadcast of "Fahrenheit 9/11" one day before the American election could not have been made without Saban’s approval.

And here's the rest of the story...

Saban was the top donor for the Democratic national Committee during the Clinton administration. And he’s a top donor for the Democrats in the 2004 U.S. presidential election campaign. That’s been confirmed by The Washington Post:

"Among the leading (Kerry) donors with an interest in Jewish issues, particularly U.S.-Israeli relations, is Haim Saban, the chief executive of Saban Capital Group and creator of the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers."

A nice example of cooperation between American Democrats and the German media. Ah well, if it’s anti-Bush, the strangest bedfellows find each other…